FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-30384
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 9:09-cr-00023-DWM
v.
MEMORANDUM *
DAVID PAUL PETERS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010 **
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
David Paul Peters appeals from his 262-month sentence imposed following
his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin,
in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(B) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Peters contends that his counsel was ineffective by failing to challenge the
district court’s finding that the conspiracy started in 2005, giving rise to a career
offender designation that led to a higher advisory guidelines range. Although we
generally do not address claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct
review, we can consider the merits where the record on appeal is sufficiently
developed to permit determination of the issue. See United States v. Alferahin, 433
F.3d 1148, 1160-61 n.6 (9th Cir. 2006). The record reflects that Peters’s counsel
was not deficient, nor was Peters prejudiced by any possibly deficient
performance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-30384